Skip to content

HBASE-29225 Add module for Jetty 12 with EE8 to hbase-thirdparty - #131

Merged
NihalJain merged 12 commits into
apache:masterfrom
NihalJain:jetty12
May 9, 2025
Merged

HBASE-29225 Add module for Jetty 12 with EE8 to hbase-thirdparty#131
NihalJain merged 12 commits into
apache:masterfrom
NihalJain:jetty12

Conversation

@NihalJain

@NihalJainNihalJain commented Mar 11, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

This PR adds a new set of modules which we will need for Jetty 12 migration. The code has been modularised into 3 modules:

  • hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-core: Contains shaded jetty 12 core jars
  • hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8: Contains shaded jetty EE8 specific jars

So basically:

  • Branches which want to consume EE8 may need to add hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-core and hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8 in their dependency replacing the former hbase-shaded-jetty
  • Branches which want to consume EE9/EE10 may need to add a new module for same in hbase-thirdparty in future

@NihalJain

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@Apache-HBase

This comment was marked as outdated.

@Apache-HBase

This comment was marked as outdated.

@NihalJainNihalJain changed the title [WIP] Add a jetty 12 module with EE8HBASE-29225 Add module for Jetty 12 with EE8 to hbase-thirdpartyMar 27, 2025
*/


ON MVN COMPILE NOT WORKING

@NihalJainNihalJainMar 27, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we need to copy this header? this file is copy of original jetty module

@NihalJain
NihalJain marked this pull request as ready for review March 27, 2025 12:55
@stoty

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I am not sure about the name, but jetty12 wouldn't be great either.
Whether to use the same package for relocation is another question.
I guess that importing two different relocated jetty versions is not something that we want support, so re-using the package name is fine.

@NihalJain

NihalJain commented Mar 27, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

I am not sure about the name, but jetty12 wouldn't be great either.

Yes hence thought to create env specific names.

I guess that importing two different relocated jetty versions is not something that we want support, so re-using the package name is fine

Yes this is a fair concern. Although, we would not want to have shaded jetty9 in our classpath given we rely on shaded jetty12-eeX. But I am afraid what if hadoop timeline service or something else brings it in indirectly.?

@Apache-HBase

This comment was marked as outdated.

@stoty

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I am not sure about the name, but jetty12 wouldn't be great either.

Yes hence thought to create env specific names.

IUC since the eeX stuff is in separate packages, we could add any or all ee specification modules.
If we keep the ee8 name, then migrate to ee9/10 for jakarta, then the module/artifact name will be misleading.
I would rather add the additional eeX modules to existing jetty thirdparty tha duplicate everything for each one.

As bad a jetty12 would be a bad name, at least we're not tying it to the ee spec version. Maybe jetty-new ? or Jetty-b ?

I guess that importing two different relocated jetty versions is not something that we want support, so re-using the package name is fine

Yes this is a fair concern. Although, we would not want to have shaded jetty9 in our classpath if with have jetty12-eeX, but I am afraid what if hadoop timeline service or something else brings it in indirectly.?

Ideally, thirdparty netty shouldn't be brought in by the hbase client. ( I have not checked if that's true)
Anything expecting to run in the master/coprocessor JVMs shouldn also not be depending on thirdparty.

@NihalJain

NihalJain commented Mar 27, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

IUC since the eeX stuff is in separate packages, we could add any or all ee specification modules.
If we keep the ee8 name, then migrate to ee9/10 for jakarta, then the module/artifact name will be misleading.
I would rather add the additional eeX modules to existing jetty thirdparty tha duplicate everything for each one.

Exactly that is the plan. Please refer https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-29224

Phase 2:

  • Add Jetty 12 with EE9 to hbase-thirdparty and jersey 3. And may be some other artifacts (not sure at this point)
  • Next consume this version of hbase-thirdparty, move to jetty 12 with EE9, bump jakarta servlet to 5.x / 6.x, tomcat to > 10.x / 11.x and migrate all the dependencies and code to jakarta namespace
    • Blockers?? Hadoop AuthenticationFilter dependent and related code need to be either shaded to move from javax to
      jakarta, or we would need to wait for hadoop for move to jakarta. (In my rough analysis, I have identified this till now, > > when we attempt it might be more stuff)
  • Test and verify everything is working as expected

@NihalJain

NihalJain commented Mar 27, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

As bad a jetty12 would be a bad name, at least we're not tying it to the ee spec version. Maybe jetty-new ? or Jetty-b ?

I am not sure if I understand you correctly but we may need all versions of jetty to exist:

Hence created a new module for ee8 as first step.

@stoty

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

As bad a jetty12 would be a bad name, at least we're not tying it to the ee spec version. Maybe jetty-new ? or Jetty-b ?

I am not sure if I understand you correctly but we may need all versions of jetty to exist:

Hence created a new module for ee8 as first step.

AFAICT ee8 and ee9 does not have to be a separate project.
IUC the different modules can co-exist because they are under different package names.

So we could maintain a single hbase-shaded-netty-whatever package, that includes ee8 for now, and we can add ee9 later (while retaining ee8 for older hbase branches).

@NihalJain

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

As bad a jetty12 would be a bad name, at least we're not tying it to the ee spec version. Maybe jetty-new ? or Jetty-b ?

I am not sure if I understand you correctly but we may need all versions of jetty to exist:

Hence created a new module for ee8 as first step.

AFAICT ee8 and ee9 does not have to be a separate project. IUC the different modules can co-exist because they are under different package names.

So we could maintain a single hbase-shaded-netty-whatever package, that includes ee8 for now, and we can add ee9 later (while retaining ee8 for older hbase branches).

Okay got your point. Agreed, created 2 modules as we have a javax dependency inside thirdparty jetty (not sure why), copied same inside new module. If we can build without this bundled, then we should be good maybe.

@NihalJain

NihalJain commented Mar 27, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

So we could maintain a single hbase-shaded-netty-whatever package, that includes ee8 for now, and we can add ee9 later (while retaining ee8 for older hbase branches).

Updated PR with both EE8 + EE9 changes (for testing purpose), will rerun UTs locally and update. Also renamed hbase-shaded-jetty-ee8 to hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus for time being

Comment threadhbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus/pom.xml Outdated
@Apache-HBase

This comment was marked as outdated.

@stoty

stoty commented Mar 28, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Do you think it would make sense to split this up, so that we have a base shaded jetty package, and separate jee8 and jee9 shaded packages ?

@NihalJain

NihalJain commented Mar 28, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Okay got your point. Agreed, created 2 modules as we have a javax dependency inside thirdparty jetty (not sure why), copied same inside new module. If we can build without this bundled, then we should be good maybe.

Updated PR with both EE8 + EE9 changes (for testing purpose), will rerun UTs locally and update. Also renamed hbase-shaded-jetty-ee8 to hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus for time being

I ran the UTs with the apache/hbase#6783 and all tests passed locally. We are good with a single package for eeX. So javax dependency was indeed redundant.

Should I retain the ee9 change here or revert? WDYT?

Do you think it would make sense to split this up, so that we have a base shaded jetty package, and separate jee8 and jee9 shaded packages ?

In HBase it may not help as our jetty-core and eeX specific imports happen together. I mean we don't seem to have an module which only depends on jetty but not eeX. We would eventually end up with including both dependencies to our module pom's.

Comment threadpom.xml Outdated
@stoty

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

My use case would be for example:

  • Hbase 3.0 uses ee8, so we don't need the ee10 modules
  • HBase 3.1 uses ee10, so we don't need the ee8 modules.

Not a huge deal either way, but saves a bit on the assembly size.

@NihalJain

NihalJain commented Mar 28, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

My use case would be for example:

  • Hbase 3.0 uses ee8, so we don't need the ee10 modules
  • HBase 3.1 uses ee10, so we don't need the ee8 modules.

Not a huge deal either way, but saves a bit on the assembly size.

Ah yes we could definitely save a few MBs here and avoid bundling redundant code. Just to be clear, we are suggesting to break into modules as below:

  • Jetty-12-plus
  • Jetty-12-plus-EE8
  • Jetty-12-plus-EE10 etc

So basically fall back to the initial approach of this PR, but maybe a new module for base? Right?

@stoty

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

My use case would be for example:

  • Hbase 3.0 uses ee8, so we don't need the ee10 modules
  • HBase 3.1 uses ee10, so we don't need the ee8 modules.

Not a huge deal either way, but saves a bit on the assembly size.

Ah yes we could definitely save a few MBs here and avoid bundling redundant code. Just to be clear, we are suggesting to break into modules as below:

  • Jetty-12-plus
  • Jetty-12-plus-EE8
  • Jetty-12-plus-EE10 etc

So basically fall back to the initial approach of this PR, but maybe a new module for base? Right?

Right

@NihalJain

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

My use case would be for example:

  • Hbase 3.0 uses ee8, so we don't need the ee10 modules
  • HBase 3.1 uses ee10, so we don't need the ee8 modules.

Not a huge deal either way, but saves a bit on the assembly size.

Ah yes we could definitely save a few MBs here and avoid bundling redundant code. Just to be clear, we are suggesting to break into modules as below:

  • Jetty-12-plus
  • Jetty-12-plus-EE8
  • Jetty-12-plus-EE10 etc

So basically fall back to the initial approach of this PR, but maybe a new module for base? Right?

Right

Cool sounds good to me, should I update the PR with the suggestion? or wait sometime for what others opine? I am good either ways, simple change.

@stoty

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

If you agree, then I think updating it now would let the others see what our current best approach is.

@Apache-HBase

This comment has been minimized.

@Apache-HBase

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🎊 +1 overall

VoteSubsystemRuntimeComment
+0 🆗reexec1m 3sDocker mode activated.
_ Prechecks _
+1 💚dupname0m 0sNo case conflicting files found.
+1 💚@author0m 0sThe patch does not contain any @author tags.
-0 ⚠️test4tests0m 0sThe patch doesn't appear to include any new or modified tests. Please justify why no new tests are needed for this patch. Also please list what manual steps were performed to verify this patch.
_ master Compile Tests _
+1 💚mvninstall1m 3smaster passed
+1 💚compile0m 22smaster passed
+1 💚javadoc0m 11smaster passed
-0 ⚠️patch1m 41sUsed diff version of patch file. Binary files and potentially other changes not applied. Please rebase and squash commits if necessary.
_ Patch Compile Tests _
+0 🆗mvndep0m 12sMaven dependency ordering for patch
+1 💚mvninstall1m 19sthe patch passed
+1 💚compile0m 38sthe patch passed
+1 💚javac0m 38sthe patch passed
+1 💚whitespace0m 0sThe patch has no whitespace issues.
+1 💚xml0m 3sThe patch has no ill-formed XML file.
+1 💚javadoc0m 24sthe patch passed
_ Other Tests _
+1 💚unit0m 7shbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-core in the patch passed.
+1 💚unit0m 8shbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8 in the patch passed.
+1 💚unit0m 51sroot in the patch passed.
+1 💚asflicense0m 22sThe patch does not generate ASF License warnings.
6m 52s
SubsystemReport/Notes
DockerClientAPI=1.43 ServerAPI=1.43 base: https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/15/artifact/yetus-precommit-check/output/Dockerfile
GITHUB PR#131
Optional Testsdupname asflicense javac javadoc unit xml compile
unameLinux 236c5f739ca2 5.4.0-1103-aws #111~18.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Tue May 23 20:04:10 UTC 2023 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Build toolmaven
git revisionmaster / 5bb7b54
Default JavaTemurin-1.8.0_442-b06
Test Resultshttps://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/15/testReport/
Max. process+thread count384 (vs. ulimit of 1000)
modulesC: hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-corehbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8 . U: .
Console outputhttps://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/15/console
versionsgit=2.43.0 maven=3.9.9
Powered byApache Yetus 0.12.0 https://yetus.apache.org

This message was automatically generated.

@Apache-HBase

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🎊 +1 overall

VoteSubsystemRuntimeComment
+0 🆗reexec1m 6sDocker mode activated.
_ Prechecks _
+1 💚dupname0m 0sNo case conflicting files found.
+1 💚@author0m 0sThe patch does not contain any @author tags.
-0 ⚠️test4tests0m 0sThe patch doesn't appear to include any new or modified tests. Please justify why no new tests are needed for this patch. Also please list what manual steps were performed to verify this patch.
_ master Compile Tests _
+1 💚mvninstall0m 59smaster passed
+1 💚compile0m 16smaster passed
+1 💚javadoc0m 9smaster passed
-0 ⚠️patch1m 29sUsed diff version of patch file. Binary files and potentially other changes not applied. Please rebase and squash commits if necessary.
_ Patch Compile Tests _
+0 🆗mvndep0m 9sMaven dependency ordering for patch
+1 💚mvninstall1m 1sthe patch passed
+1 💚compile0m 28sthe patch passed
+1 💚javac0m 28sthe patch passed
+1 💚whitespace0m 0sThe patch has no whitespace issues.
+1 💚xml0m 2sThe patch has no ill-formed XML file.
+1 💚javadoc0m 19sthe patch passed
_ Other Tests _
+1 💚unit0m 6shbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-core in the patch passed.
+1 💚unit0m 5shbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8 in the patch passed.
+1 💚unit0m 53sroot in the patch passed.
+1 💚asflicense0m 17sThe patch does not generate ASF License warnings.
6m 9s
SubsystemReport/Notes
DockerClientAPI=1.43 ServerAPI=1.43 base: https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/16/artifact/yetus-precommit-check/output/Dockerfile
GITHUB PR#131
Optional Testsdupname asflicense javac javadoc unit xml compile
unameLinux b14f490c4cc5 5.4.0-1103-aws #111~18.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Tue May 23 20:04:10 UTC 2023 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Build toolmaven
git revisionmaster / e545fe1
Default JavaTemurin-1.8.0_452-b09
Test Resultshttps://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/16/testReport/
Max. process+thread count384 (vs. ulimit of 1000)
modulesC: hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-corehbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8 . U: .
Console outputhttps://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/16/console
versionsgit=2.43.0 maven=3.9.9
Powered byApache Yetus 0.12.0 https://yetus.apache.org

This message was automatically generated.

Comment threadpom.xml Outdated
@Apache-HBase

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🎊 +1 overall

VoteSubsystemRuntimeComment
+0 🆗reexec0m 27sDocker mode activated.
_ Prechecks _
+1 💚dupname0m 0sNo case conflicting files found.
+1 💚@author0m 0sThe patch does not contain any @author tags.
-0 ⚠️test4tests0m 0sThe patch doesn't appear to include any new or modified tests. Please justify why no new tests are needed for this patch. Also please list what manual steps were performed to verify this patch.
_ master Compile Tests _
+1 💚mvninstall0m 51smaster passed
+1 💚compile0m 16smaster passed
+1 💚javadoc0m 9smaster passed
-0 ⚠️patch1m 21sUsed diff version of patch file. Binary files and potentially other changes not applied. Please rebase and squash commits if necessary.
_ Patch Compile Tests _
+0 🆗mvndep0m 10sMaven dependency ordering for patch
+1 💚mvninstall1m 2sthe patch passed
+1 💚compile0m 28sthe patch passed
+1 💚javac0m 28sthe patch passed
+1 💚whitespace0m 0sThe patch has no whitespace issues.
+1 💚xml0m 2sThe patch has no ill-formed XML file.
+1 💚javadoc0m 18sthe patch passed
_ Other Tests _
+1 💚unit0m 6shbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-core in the patch passed.
+1 💚unit0m 6shbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8 in the patch passed.
+1 💚unit0m 54sroot in the patch passed.
+1 💚asflicense0m 19sThe patch does not generate ASF License warnings.
5m 20s
SubsystemReport/Notes
DockerClientAPI=1.43 ServerAPI=1.43 base: https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/17/artifact/yetus-precommit-check/output/Dockerfile
GITHUB PR#131
Optional Testsdupname asflicense javac javadoc unit xml compile
unameLinux 4aab8c9ded0f 5.4.0-1103-aws #111~18.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Tue May 23 20:04:10 UTC 2023 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Build toolmaven
git revisionmaster / e545fe1
Default JavaTemurin-1.8.0_452-b09
Test Resultshttps://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/17/testReport/
Max. process+thread count397 (vs. ulimit of 1000)
modulesC: hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-corehbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8 . U: .
Console outputhttps://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/17/console
versionsgit=2.43.0 maven=3.9.9
Powered byApache Yetus 0.12.0 https://yetus.apache.org

This message was automatically generated.

@NihalJain

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Hi @stoty Should I go ahead and merge this one? Or should wait a few more days for more eyes?

Will go ahead and merge this today.? could not get any more reviews here.

Comment threadpom.xml Outdated
@NihalJain

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Bumped to jetty 12.0.20, pending CI

@Apache-HBase

Copy link
Copy Markdown

💔 -1 overall

VoteSubsystemRuntimeComment
+0 🆗reexec0m 0sDocker mode activated.
-1 ❌patch0m 3s#131 does not apply to master. Rebase required? Wrong Branch? See https://yetus.apache.org/documentation/in-progress/precommit-patchnames for help.
SubsystemReport/Notes
GITHUB PR#131
Console outputhttps://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/18/console
versionsgit=2.17.1
Powered byApache Yetus 0.12.0 https://yetus.apache.org

This message was automatically generated.

@Apache-HBase

Copy link
Copy Markdown

💔 -1 overall

VoteSubsystemRuntimeComment
+0 🆗reexec0m 0sDocker mode activated.
-1 ❌patch0m 3s#131 does not apply to master. Rebase required? Wrong Branch? See https://yetus.apache.org/documentation/in-progress/precommit-patchnames for help.
SubsystemReport/Notes
GITHUB PR#131
Console outputhttps://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/19/console
versionsgit=2.17.1
Powered byApache Yetus 0.12.0 https://yetus.apache.org

This message was automatically generated.

@Apache-HBase

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🎊 +1 overall

VoteSubsystemRuntimeComment
+0 🆗reexec0m 59sDocker mode activated.
_ Prechecks _
+1 💚dupname0m 0sNo case conflicting files found.
+1 💚@author0m 0sThe patch does not contain any @author tags.
-0 ⚠️test4tests0m 0sThe patch doesn't appear to include any new or modified tests. Please justify why no new tests are needed for this patch. Also please list what manual steps were performed to verify this patch.
_ master Compile Tests _
+1 💚mvninstall0m 46smaster passed
+1 💚compile0m 11smaster passed
+1 💚javadoc0m 7smaster passed
-0 ⚠️patch1m 10sUsed diff version of patch file. Binary files and potentially other changes not applied. Please rebase and squash commits if necessary.
_ Patch Compile Tests _
+0 🆗mvndep0m 9sMaven dependency ordering for patch
+1 💚mvninstall0m 52sthe patch passed
+1 💚compile0m 23sthe patch passed
+1 💚javac0m 23sthe patch passed
+1 💚whitespace0m 0sThe patch has no whitespace issues.
+1 💚xml0m 2sThe patch has no ill-formed XML file.
+1 💚javadoc0m 16sthe patch passed
_ Other Tests _
+1 💚unit0m 5shbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-core in the patch passed.
+1 💚unit0m 5shbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8 in the patch passed.
+1 💚unit0m 45sroot in the patch passed.
+1 💚asflicense0m 15sThe patch does not generate ASF License warnings.
5m 6s
SubsystemReport/Notes
DockerClientAPI=1.43 ServerAPI=1.43 base: https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/20/artifact/yetus-precommit-check/output/Dockerfile
GITHUB PR#131
Optional Testsdupname asflicense javac javadoc unit xml compile
unameLinux c775745476df 5.4.0-1103-aws #111~18.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Tue May 23 20:04:10 UTC 2023 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Build toolmaven
git revisionmaster / e545fe1
Default JavaTemurin-1.8.0_452-b09
Test Resultshttps://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/20/testReport/
Max. process+thread count383 (vs. ulimit of 1000)
modulesC: hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-corehbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8 . U: .
Console outputhttps://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/20/console
versionsgit=2.43.0 maven=3.9.9
Powered byApache Yetus 0.12.0 https://yetus.apache.org

This message was automatically generated.

@Apache-HBase

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🎊 +1 overall

VoteSubsystemRuntimeComment
+0 🆗reexec0m 26sDocker mode activated.
_ Prechecks _
+1 💚dupname0m 0sNo case conflicting files found.
+1 💚@author0m 0sThe patch does not contain any @author tags.
-0 ⚠️test4tests0m 0sThe patch doesn't appear to include any new or modified tests. Please justify why no new tests are needed for this patch. Also please list what manual steps were performed to verify this patch.
_ master Compile Tests _
+1 💚mvninstall0m 33smaster passed
+1 💚compile0m 13smaster passed
+1 💚javadoc0m 6smaster passed
-0 ⚠️patch0m 56sUsed diff version of patch file. Binary files and potentially other changes not applied. Please rebase and squash commits if necessary.
_ Patch Compile Tests _
+0 🆗mvndep0m 6sMaven dependency ordering for patch
+1 💚mvninstall0m 50sthe patch passed
+1 💚compile0m 23sthe patch passed
+1 💚javac0m 23sthe patch passed
+1 💚whitespace0m 0sThe patch has no whitespace issues.
+1 💚xml0m 2sThe patch has no ill-formed XML file.
+1 💚javadoc0m 16sthe patch passed
_ Other Tests _
+1 💚unit0m 5shbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-core in the patch passed.
+1 💚unit0m 5shbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8 in the patch passed.
+1 💚unit0m 43sroot in the patch passed.
+1 💚asflicense0m 15sThe patch does not generate ASF License warnings.
4m 11s
SubsystemReport/Notes
DockerClientAPI=1.43 ServerAPI=1.43 base: https://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/21/artifact/yetus-precommit-check/output/Dockerfile
GITHUB PR#131
Optional Testsdupname asflicense javac javadoc unit xml compile
unameLinux 0f3072bbe0d5 5.4.0-1103-aws #111~18.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Tue May 23 20:04:10 UTC 2023 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Build toolmaven
git revisionmaster / e545fe1
Default JavaTemurin-1.8.0_452-b09
Test Resultshttps://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/21/testReport/
Max. process+thread count400 (vs. ulimit of 1000)
modulesC: hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-corehbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8 . U: .
Console outputhttps://ci-hbase.apache.org/job/HBase-Thirdparty-PreCommit/job/PR-131/21/console
versionsgit=2.43.0 maven=3.9.9
Powered byApache Yetus 0.12.0 https://yetus.apache.org

This message was automatically generated.

@NihalJain
NihalJain merged commit 6016e75 into apache:masterMay 9, 2025
NihalJain added a commit to NihalJain/hbase-thirdparty that referenced this pull request May 26, 2025
NihalJain added a commit that referenced this pull request May 26, 2025
 (#131)" (#140)
This reverts commit 6016e75.
Signed-off-by: Duo Zhang <zhangduo@apache.org>
NihalJain added a commit to NihalJain/hbase-thirdparty that referenced this pull request Jul 10, 2025
…che#131)
This change adds a new set of modules which we will need for Jetty 12 migration. The code has been modularised into following modules:
- `hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-core`: Contains shaded jetty 12 core jars
- `hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8`: Contains shaded jetty EE8 specific jars
So basically:
- Branches which want to consume EE8 may need to add `hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-core` and `hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8` in their dependency replacing the former `hbase-shaded-jetty`
- Branches which want to consume EE9/EE10 may need to add a new module for same in `hbase-thirdparty` in future
Signed-off-by: Istvan Toth <stoty@apache.org>
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@NihalJain@Apache-HBase@stoty@apurtell